A152 FOREIGN BODY INGESTIONS AT A TERTIARY CARE CENTRE - A QUALITY ASSURANCE STUDY
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Foreign body ingestion and esophageal food bolus impaction are common emergencies encountered by gastroenterologists. If not treated in a timely fashion these can result in significant morbidity, or even mortality. The mainstay of diagnosis and therapy is endoscopy. Guidelines regarding timing of endoscopy have been published by both the American and European Societies of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, and both suggest emergent endoscopy, meaning within 2 to 6 hours, for complete esophageal obstructions. There is relatively sparse data regarding the endoscopic techniques used in real world practice. Aims This is a quality assurance study looking at the endoscopic practices at an adult tertiary care hospital in Halifax, Nova Scotia with respect to foreign body and food impaction management. Methods The hospital records of all patients presenting with ingested foreign bodies or esophageal food bolus impactions between May 2018 and July 2019 were included. Patients were identified by searching the call-back forms used by our department which documents all on-call endoscopy cases. This was then cross-referenced by endoscopy nursing charting which documents every endoscopy performed. Information such as demographics, obstruction type, endoscopic method of removal, complications, time between consultation and endoscopy, underlying pathology, and others were analyzed. Results 70 cases were identified. Average patient age was 51.3 years old (range 16–96). 18 (25.7%) were female and 52 (74.3%) were male. 64 cases (91.4%) were esophageal food impactions and 6 (8.57%) were foreign body ingestions. Of the food impactions, 39 cases (60.9%) were cleared by the push/slide-by technique only and 10 (16.7%) were relieved using instruments such as snares, forceps, or nets. 15 (23.4%) passed spontaneously prior to scope, of which 7 received glucagon. An overtube was used in 1 case (0.16%). Complications occurred in 5 (7.8%) cases and included 3 mucosal tears, 2 of which required therapeutic interventions, and 2 episodes of oxygen desaturation in which the procedure was aborted. Complete obstructions occurred in 42 (65.6%) cases with average time of consultation to endoscopy of 2.4 hours. However, 3 (7.1%) cases exceeded 6 hours. The most common pathology was eosinophilic esophagitis with 20 cases (31.3%). Ingested foreign bodies included 2 long objects, 3 sharp objects, and a cylindrical battery, and all but one were in the stomach. 5 (83.3%) cases used an overtube. No complications occurred. Conclusions At our institution 67/70 (95.7%) cases were performed within the timelines recommended by society guidelines. No complications occurred in the cases not performed within those time limits. An overtube was used in only one case in which a food bolus was retrieved out of the esophagus. Overall this study suggests that our centre is meeting recommended targets, however there is room for improvement. Funding Agencies None
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".